* Spin: Use deception, falsehood, or lie.
It’s a big mistake to let the deceivers control the language.
NATIONAL IDENTIFICATION: MORE TO GAIN THAN TO LOSE
Americans have a variety of opinions on what changes, if any, should be made to our immigration policies, but most agree on one aspect. For all practical purposes, the United States borders now are almost uncontrollable revolving doors. With 1,950 miles of Mexican border and 4,000 Canadian, even large numbers of military troops on the border could not stop illegal entries, and a large flow of tourist and business traffic in both directions must be allowed to cross as painlessly as possible.
It is generally accepted that, soon after many illegal aliens who are caught trying to enter and are taken back across the border, they embark on further attempts. (Some object to calling them illegal. The U.S. Code makes the first illegal entry a misdemeanor and each subsequent one a felony.) Most determined ones eventually get in, and Obama’s unconstitutional policy is clear: once in, they are permitted to stay unless they commit another major crime.
Almost everyone is mincing around the only way - the unthinkable way - to provide what is absolutely necessary if we are to restore control of who is our country. Unless every person in the United States is required to have a biometric identification with one central data base, there is no way a police officer, employer, welfare case worker, airport security person or voting official can verify a person’s identity and legality. Use of national identification should be strictly limited to those purposes, with heavy penalties for any other use, and the data base should include only the person’s name, citizenship status and any criminal record or outstanding arrest warrants.
Libertarians, the ACLU and other self-appointed spokesmen for ethnic minorities, illegal aliens and many others warn of a loss of privacy any secure system would cause. In fact, we lost our privacy long ago. With Social Security numbers, debit and credit cards, bank accounts, credit reporting networks, retail sales records, Internet cookies and now outrageous, unconstitutional NSA and IRS federal snooping and unmanned drones, what “privacy” do they mean to protect?
Compare the possible loss of a little more privacy with these benefits:
* Reducing substantially the number of illegal aliens in the country, including Muslim terrorists.
* Increasing job opportunities and wage levels for our permanent legal underclass.
* Stopping voting fraud, especially rampant in large cities.
* Reducing crime by enabling the police to identify instantly criminals, illegal aliens and persons on overstayed visas. Now that varies from difficult to impossible.